4 ms·

Serious questions: are the country's institutions strong enough to provide for checks and balances against the executive branch as it grows unchecked, in realit

by pizza 2y ago

Serious questions: are the country's institutions strong enough to provide for checks and balances against the executive branch as it grows unchecked, in reality? If so, how does that play out? Are the timescales of the checks and balances always receding from a never ending stream of things that need accountability?

duxup 2y ago
Congress it’s doing anything about it, it’s controlled by the GoP. The courts are all that’s left and SCOTUS already declared Trump is more equal than everyone else … so not sure he even has to listen to the courts…
cmurf 2y ago
The federalist papers are the source material that answer your questions. Lincoln's 1838 Lyceum speech, and 1st inaugural address are also relevant, covering mob rule, disputes between minority and majority, and what happens if one doesn't yield. My opinion is no. The institutions are not strong enough on their own, and this is by design. It compels the people to stand up for the Constitution. And they should want to do that if they know even a little bit about power. The core concept of the Constitution is polyarchy, to intentionally fragment power, to make ambition counter ambition. The founders' concern was the concentration of power. When government fails, power doesn't return to the people. The people don't somehow become free, as if they weren't already free. The power is consolidated by a small number of individuals, and the people become subject to their tyranny. The design of the government is to make it difficult for power to consolidate in secret or quickly, giving the people every opportunity to stand opposed to the consolidation of power. A president could ignore the judiciary, violating their oath office which imparts a fiduciary duty to uphold the law. And a Congress could fail to impeach and remove from office such a president. Indeed both occurring at once implies an enormously weak citizenry, ripe for power consolidating in front of them. But it can't be said the people have chosen to end Constitutional order by doing so. The Constitution of the United States is a contract, ratified by state legislatures. The only legitimate way to dissolve the contract is for 3/4 of the states to ratify an amendment calling for it. State governors especially will not be so docile as the Congress. As federal programs are increasingly left in abeyance, and money earmarked for the states is held up or clawed back, I expect to see governors become more assertive.

by pizza 2y ago

duxup 2y ago

Congress it’s doing anything about it, it’s controlled by the GoP. The courts are all that’s left and SCOTUS already declared Trump is more equal than everyone else … so not sure he even has to listen to the courts…

cmurf 2y ago

The federalist papers are the source material that answer your questions. Lincoln's 1838 Lyceum speech, and 1st inaugural address are also relevant, covering mob rule, disputes between minority and majority, and what happens if one doesn't yield. My opinion is no. The institutions are not strong enough on their own, and this is by design. It compels the people to stand up for the Constitution. And they should want to do that if they know even a little bit about power. The core concept of the Constitution is polyarchy, to intentionally fragment power, to make ambition counter ambition. The founders' concern was the concentration of power. When government fails, power doesn't return to the people. The people don't somehow become free, as if they weren't already free. The power is consolidated by a small number of individuals, and the people become subject to their tyranny. The design of the government is to make it difficult for power to consolidate in secret or quickly, giving the people every opportunity to stand opposed to the consolidation of power. A president could ignore the judiciary, violating their oath office which imparts a fiduciary duty to uphold the law. And a Congress could fail to impeach and remove from office such a president. Indeed both occurring at once implies an enormously weak citizenry, ripe for power consolidating in front of them. But it can't be said the people have chosen to end Constitutional order by doing so. The Constitution of the United States is a contract, ratified by state legislatures. The only legitimate way to dissolve the contract is for 3/4 of the states to ratify an amendment calling for it. State governors especially will not be so docile as the Congress. As federal programs are increasingly left in abeyance, and money earmarked for the states is held up or clawed back, I expect to see governors become more assertive.